Monday, February 6, 2012

Killing Americans Citizens Without Due Process.

You may remember that lawyers for the Obama administration have advised the president that using drones to target and kill American citizens without a trial is perfectly legal. If you were outraged by this so-called legal opinion and convinced it was made without any respect for the Constitution's due process requirements, take heart: The American Civil Liberties Union agrees with you.

In fact, the ACLU has now filed suit against the Obama administration to provide details of, believe it or not, the 10-year-old program of using drones to target and kill American citizens.

"The request relates to a topic of vital importance: the power of the U.S. government to kill U.S. citizens without presentation of evidence and without disclosing legal standards that guide decision makers," says the ACLU suit. "Given the momentous nature of the governmental powers that are subject of the request, the fullest possible transparency and disclosure is vital."

Momentous, indeed. The legal organization has said no one knows just how many Americans have been killed since the program began around 2002, but it's a huge concern that has dire constitutional implications, especially following the government's determination that even suspected terrorists can be killed, even if they are Americans by birth and citizenship.

The ACLU's complaint stems from the Obama administration's decision to kill Anwar al Awlaki, a U.S. citizen and leading al Qaeda figure who died following a drone strike on his position in a mountainous region of Yemen Sept. 30. Two other U.S. citizens - al Awlaki's son, Abdulrahman, and Samir Khan, were also killed by drone strikes in Yemen last year. And like al Awlaki, none of them were ever charged with terrorism, and you have to charge Americans with a crime if you think they're guilty of something. That's the way it works.

But instead of being forthright, the president has chosen instead to downplay the program, telling viewers during a digital interview from the White House recently only a few civilians have been killed in drone strikes.

"I want people to understand that drones have not caused a huge number of civilian casualties," he said in the interview. "For the most part, they have been very precise, precision strikes against al-Qaeda and their affiliates, and we have been very careful about how it's been applied."

Sure.

The truth is, other than a few privileged elites within the administration, no one really knows whether the president is being honest or not. And the ACLU says we have a right to know. The organization is undoubtedly correct on this matter.

"The government's self-serving attitude toward transparency and disclosure is unacceptable," says the ACLU complaint. "Although U.S. government officials, including the president and the secretary of defense, have made statements on the record confirming the existence of the targeted killing program, the government has not disclosed the process by which it adds names to the so-called 'kill lists;' the standards under which it determines which Americans may be put to death; or the evidentiary basis on which it concluded that those standards were satisfied in any particular case."

U.S. lawmakers and international legal bodies also want more information about the program. But like the ACLU's complaint makes clear, those who deserve answers most are us - the taxpayers and citizens the Constitution was written to protect.

1 comment:

Anonymous
said...

The ACLU finally found a case worthy of its name. It is about time the ACLU stopped clogging the courts with cases involving pulling down Christian symbols from schools, churches and State Houses; and, removing the crosses from the graves of soldiers in military cemeteries. This is a real issue of vital importance to all American regardless of their political persuasion.

About Me

I am a thoroughly civilized, humane, cosmopolitan, polished, restrained, enjoyable, entertaining Info-maniac. I am a staunch exponent of individual dignity, freedom, equal access to legal services, and equal protection of the law. Here I hope to demonstrate my emotional restraint, humbleness of sentiment, psychological subtlety, lucid style, and simple language, without evading political reality or eternal truth. Daily I am excited that I have the right to create the beginning of a new self and to challenge old habits and attitudes I no longer choose to accept. I choose to relax in the present with my direction firmly in mind. I have an enormous capacity for creative and clever ideas and thoughts. It is phenomenal what I can do. I am capable of so much learning and absorbing a lot of information. My potential is a source of pleasant surprise for me.
Each day, I increase in knowledge, skills, strength, faith, and abilities.With each adventure, the boundary hemming in my potential expands easily to accomodate my growth and achievements.